Uncover “covert marketing” to shop smarter

The same impulse behind my degree in religious studies is responsible for my interest in neuroscience and behaviorism in branding and marketing. I want to know what people believe, and what motivates them. I also believe that a deeper understanding of these things makes us better decision makers. (And I’m all for better decision making, since I’ve made some questionable choices in my lifetime.)

Our local paper, the Daily Hampshire Gazette, ran a piece around the holidays on the importance of shoppers knowing themselves. It focused on the work of University of Massachusetts associate professor of marketing George R. Milne and his wife, marketing consultant Shalini Bahl. They talked about the neurology behind shopping. For them, it boils down to whether or not we listen to voices in our head, and they’re not talking about the proverbial devil and angel on your shoulders. The voices represent different personas that fall into general categories: critical, social, professional, spiritual, creative and desirous. The voices are with us through most decision-making, suggesting reasons we should—or shouldn’t—buy something. For example, the social or desirous voices might tell you to buy that pair of Uggs as they will likely increase your social standing, but the spiritual voice questions whether such a purchase of an ugly, fad product is just giving in to soulless consumerism. It is our job to recognize and control these internal persuaders, because if we don’t, advertisers and marketers will.

Milne and Bahl call this way of trying to manipulate consumers “covert marketing,” which they define as “the intentional omission and distortion of facts by marketers pertaining to the collection and or dissemination of information by marketers.” They definitely see themselves as consumer advocates, and know that the problem is figuring out what to do about covert marketing. Like its cousin subliminal advertising, it is hard to know when a company has deceived you. For example, neuromarketing and behavioral insights like those I’ve discussed in this blog, though public, may not be known by most of the public. And if you don’t know you’re being lured to buy something, you’re much more likely to buy it.

Still, there are some basic tidbits of neuroscience knowledge that may help shoppers get their decision-making personas under control and buy only what they truly want or need.

• Pay with cash. We buy less when we pay cash than when we pay by credit card. A little region of the brain called the insula, which registers negative feelings, is less likely to react when we pay cash.

• Don’t shop when you are blue. People are more likely to overshop, and overpay, when they feel down. We hope to bolster our sense of self-esteem, via the region of the brain called the nuclear accumbens, by acquiring stuff. And it works, but only temporarily.

• Write a list before going to the grocery store. Sixty to seventy percent of purchases at supermarkets are impulse buys; this is especially for men.

• Don’t dally. The more time you spend in a store, the more you buy. Stores use a variety of techniques to get us to linger, such as slow music and nice smells.

• Always discuss a big purchase before buying. Another person’s input might be all that is needed for a reality check of whether that “must-have” item is really a good idea. Another person might activate a different voice in your head.

In the end we have to realize that we are hardwired to shop, so the more you make it a conscious activity, the less likely you are to surrender to impulses that may not be acting in your long-term best interest. For most, shopping can cause a dopamine release, stimulating the brain in the same way as food, sex, and drugs. Why does the brain respond so powerfully to something so seemingly shallow? As Paco Underhill, author of Why We Buy, reminds us, “There is nothing trivial about shopping. How much hunting and gathering does the modern man or woman do? That gene, that DNA has been transformed into our shopping instinct.”

Beware the struggle to serve both business and society

Do companies have a responsibility to fight consumerism? We all know the answer to that: no. It is the individual consumer’s responsibility to figure out what is best. Caveat emptor, kid.

Now let me rephrase the question: do we have a responsibility to our children? Most people would say “yes.” Are these beliefs mutually exclusive?

Studies show a direct link between increased materialism in youth and a decline in self-esteem. This is not just a correlation, but appears to be a causal relationship. Low self-esteem causes increased materialism. Raised self-esteem decreases it.

I confess that I’ve always been skeptical of the idea that our country’s health—and our own, by default—is so dependent on how many things we make and how many we buy. I’m not that inspired by leaders who tell me to go shop; it just seems something south of lofty. And what does this mean vis-à-vis the before-mentioned study? Is self-esteem bad for business, and hence actually bad for our individual and national health?

In his book Predictably Irrational, Dan Ariely, professor of behavioral economics at Duke University, focuses a chapter on the difference between social and market norms. Social norms relate to our social nature and need for community. They are usually warm and fuzzy, and are the reason we help others without regard for material compensation. Market norms are the opposite. They are individualistic, and focus on cost vs. benefits. For example, Ariely found that just thinking about money makes us less socially motivated.

We all live in both worlds, and do our best to keep them separate. When we don’t, we get in trouble. You are not going to keep friends if you keep a running tally of whether they “owe” you or not. And your business will suffer if you generously give everything away, and don’t pay attention to the bottom line.

The scenarios I outlined at the start illustrate the difference between these norms. The first paragraph exemplifies market-norm thinking; the following ones show social-norm decision-making. This was President Bush’s fundamental error when he told us to go shopping in times of crisis. Just when we needed to build community, he was focused on the market.

Enter Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): the philosophy that a company should take social responsibilities into account when making business decisions. Personally, I am a fan of acting in a socially responsible manner but not labeling oneself as such. I figure that, in the end, you are either putting your principles into practice or not, and if you aren’t, you will be outed before long. “Greenwashing”, or the attempt to make a company look more eco-friendly than it is, is a good example of this.

When you find yourself torn between the bottom line and the greater good, advice from outsiders is usually helpful in resolving the dilemma or in generating new ideas. My recommendation is to have socially aware consultants who can offer a more objective sounding board for your marketing ideas. Don’t rely solely on internal people; by definition, they are concerned with keeping their jobs and doing what is best for the business. And that’s an excellent thing, but it may blind you to the greater community’s needs.

Another idea is what our creative director Todd Verlander jokingly calls “guilt offsetting,” or buying your way onto Santa’s good list through good deeds. This includes carbon offsetting, recycling, and getting an office energy audit. Get buy-in from the top of your company, and get involvement at all levels. Make your commitment to CSR explicit to employees.

You can also partner with a nonprofit, or nonprofits, that share your vision. For example, an fine art paper company supports a local museum, or an engineering firm provides a scholarship to a community college. But also pay attention to the partner’s reputation and track record. From experience, I recommend pairing with a well-run organization whose mission may vary from your own rather than one whose mission may warm your heart but is ineffective. Help the successful to be more so.

Most importantly, approach CSR as a win-win situation; otherwise, it will feel like a burden and you will drop it.

Caveat, marketers.

Stereotypical Marketing

Are dads finally getting fed up with advertising that portrays them as morons? Well, even if they all aren’t, at least one person is; Gael Fashingbauer Cooper wants more “nuance” in marketing.

I’m a reflexive eye roller, especially when I consider the topic is political correctness. Cooper’s piece made my eyes roll. I mean, why get uptight? They are just ads.

Yet, the truth is that stereotypes, as inaccurate as they can be, create their own unintended reality. The University of Chicago found that the stereotype that boys are better at math actually causes girls to underperform in math. The more anxious the girls were about the stereotype, the more impaired their short-term memory, the type of memory needed to handle complex mathematical information. And that is just one of hundreds of other studies that have shown the dangers of stereotyping.

Cognitively speaking, we stereotype because it makes things easy to categorize. Kenneth Bordens and Irwin Horowitz in their book Social Psychology explain that sterotyping comes from taking mental shortcuts. One of the mind’s most intricate tasks is to govern social behavior, which requires making sense of the complex social world. A way we do that is to group data, or people, like “girls not being good at math.”

There is no escape from grouping or stereotyping. It is hard-wired, as psychologist Wim De Neys of Leuven University, Belgium discovered. The brain’s stereotype detector is activated regardless of whether somebody is generalizing or not. Ignoring the stereotype is the work of the brain’s inhibition center…should you decide to use it. So, not acting on stereotypes literally requires using more of your brain.

Now, I realize that my reflexive eye rolling was my brain’s stereotype detector at work. For me, Cooper’s article on dumb dad ads = political correctness = whining. I automatically looked away, initially not interested in seeing more.  But thankfully, I activated my inhibition center. I researched stereotyping, cognition, and marketing. I decided Cooper was right.

Can nuance be introduced even into “dumb dad” ads? Yes. The blog AdFreak provides dumb dad ad examples, all stereotypical except the Minute Maid one, which is the best in great part because it offers a refreshing twist.

In addition to the moral issues, I don’t like stereotyping for the simple reason that it is the antithesis of good marketing— it is not creative. It doesn’t use enough of the brain. The best marketing doesn’t give in to stereotypes or pretend they don’t exist. It recognizes them for the mental shortcuts that they are. Then it ignores them, or gives that unique tweak.

But I may be missing the boat. There seems to be good money in stereotyping. I simply have to use less of my brain, and as a blonde dad, I certainly know a lot about that.

Is Subliminal Marketing for You?

It was 1981 when I discovered sex in photos of ice cubes and Ritz crackers. I was a high school junior and I was desperate. This was back when finding anything about sex was difficult.

Dr. Wilson Bryan Key and his books Media Sexploitation and Subliminal Seduction changed that. He revealed how ad men hid sexual content in all their work, subconsciously steering us to consume.

As the titles of Key’s books suggest, he was concerned, but he wasn’t alone. Newsday called the technique “the most alarming invention since the atom bomb.”(Brainwash by Dominic Streatfeild). The books opened my eyes. I didn’t have to search for sex anymore! It was in the ads of every issue of my parents’ Christian Science Monitor!

The first physiological evidence that subliminal images grab the attention of the subconscious brain finally came in 2007. Dr. Bahador Bahrami of the University of College London said that their study didn’t prove that the subliminal influenced you, but the there was no doubt that the brain registered the messages unconsciously. Bahrami concluded, “subliminal advertising may affect our decisions.”

He wasn’t the only Englishman delving into the subliminal. A year earlier, magician and mentalist Derren Victor Brown performed a Brit-styled Punk’d switcharoo on a marketing firm showing the power of unconscious persuasion. This may not be science, but it is enlightening.

There are laws against subliminal messaging, but by its nature evidence is elusive, and laws are vague. Little action has ever been taken even when incidents are recorded.

As a result, what are the ethical issues of such potential power? Nudge authors Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein adopt the rule of transparency, meaning an organization is banned from doing something they are not able or willing to defend publicly. You can be subliminal as long as you are open about it.

I agree with this simple, but powerful test. If a company can’t comfortably defend its marketing techniques in public, it should not pursue those techniques at all.